the essay is that Decolonization is always a violent phenomenon. Decolonization simply means the replacing of one species of men by another and it is total and absolute, with a complete change in the social structure. The need for change exists in the consciousness of the colonized. Decolonization, a program of complete disorder can be understood only by discerning the movements which gave it form and context. It is a meeting of two opposed forcesnative and the settler who owe their existence to each other and it was carried on at the point of weapons. Decolonization is putting into practice of the principle “the last shall be first and the first last”. To bring about such change the natives should become the actors and not spectators and should employ all means including violence. The colonial world is divided into two zones- the zone of the settlers which is strongly built, brightly lit and very neat, the settlers are well-fed and easy going and the zone of the natives where they are crowded, starved of the basic needs of life which make them throw a lustful look on the settlers with a desire for possession. In the colonies the natives are silenced by means of force employed by the soldiers and police. It is they who bring violence into the lives and minds of the native. The ruler ensures his rule by force. The violence of the rulers is taken over by the natives and their aim will be the abolition of the settler’s zone. The natives are portrayed by the settlers as the essence of evil and they are negated values. The church in the colonies aim at changing the native not to the ways of God but to the ways of the white man. The dialogue of the native intellectuals with the settlers do not represent the indigenous population. The use of violence by the natives makes him aware of his equality with the settler. Decolonization unites the people on a national basis and words like brother, sister, friend are increasingly heard. The dreams of the natives are always of muscular prowess, of action and of aggression. Initially, the anger in the hearts of the native seeks an outlet by attacking his own fellows (autodestruction) and in vigorous displays of ritual dances. During the height of the freedom struggle, these practices disorganize in force and their target becomes the settler. The political parties in the colonies proclaim abstract principles, but refrain from using definite commands. Their objective is not the radical overthrow of the system but assimilation into the colonial world. They neglect the peasants and the peasants are the first to discover that only violence pays. The bourgeoisie idea of non-violence is inefficient for it cannot “cure the marks of violence left on the natives by the colonizer; only counter revolution violence can remove them”. The fear that any attempt to break colonial oppression by force is suicidal is baseless. The natives should realize the complicity between capitalism and the violent forces in the colonies. The colonial government will not destroy the colonial people for safeguarding the capitalist interests of the factory owners and financial magnets of

the mother country. Protest shows like mass demonstrations, boycotting of buses and imported goods and stoppage of work are futile attempts. New ideas and echoes from the world outside teaches them that violence is in the atmosphere for sweeping away the colonial powers. The colonial government fails to suppress the outbreak of violence in the colonies for the arresting of nationalist leaders will worsen the situation. The colonized finds his freedom through violence. It is a cleansing force that restores his self-respect. Violence in the International context In the majority cases, independence brings no immediate change. The people of the newly independent colonies are often discourteous in their dealings with the former colonists who come to observe and investigate. The young independent nation is in an atmosphere of battlefield with problems like poverty, unemployment, underdevelopment and sterile traditions. The political leaders exhort the people to make huge efforts to catch up with the European countries and to prove themselves. But Fanon is against this manner of looking at the problem. Fanon argues for a re-distribution of wealth for “the wealth of Europe has been built up with the sweat and dead bodies of the slaves”. These countries should not be satisfied with independence alone for Europe is the creation of the third world. When the leader of a European state offers help, the people should regard as reparation and not charity. The reluctance of the super power to invest in the colonies will prove catastrophic for it will deprive them of factories and unemployment. What the third world expects from the European power is that they will help it to rehabilitate mankind and make man victorious everywhere.